More than fifteen years ago, I wrote in Hindi that India's education system was steadily falling into the grip of neoliberalism. At the time, many believed that the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 represented a historic advance. I argued instead that it marked a decisive shift away from the constitutional vision of equal education for all. Looking back today, that warning appears more relevant than ever.
The debate on education in India has largely been confined to issues such as curriculum, language, communalisation, and examinations. These are undoubtedly important. Yet they often overshadow a more fundamental transformation: the gradual marketisation and commercialisation of education under neoliberal policies initiated in the early 1990s.
This transformation did not begin with the present government. It has been a bipartisan project. Successive governments, irrespective of political affiliation, have increasingly accepted the logic of the market in education. Consequently, education has become more unequal, more commercialised, and more fragmented.
The Constitution envisaged education as a public good essential for building an egalitarian and democratic society. The Directive Principles required the State to provide free and compulsory education to all children. In 1993, the Supreme Court, through the Unnikrishnan judgment, interpreted education as a fundamental right flowing from the right to life.
Instead of strengthening this constitutional commitment, the political establishment chose another path. The 86th Constitutional Amendment and the subsequent RTE Act created a framework that gave the State considerable discretion over the nature and quality of education it would provide. While the law expanded access in some respects, it also legitimised a deeply unequal education system.
Today, India has perhaps the most stratified school system in the world. Elite private schools cater to the affluent. Government schools serve the overwhelming majority. Between these lie numerous intermediate institutions of varying quality. Rather than narrowing inequalities, policy has institutionalised them.
One of the sharpest critics of this transformation has been Professor Anil Sadgopal. Few educationists have combined academic scholarship with sustained public engagement as effectively as he has. His critique of the RTE Act was never directed against expanding educational opportunities. Rather, he argued that the legislation abandoned the constitutional principle of equality in favour of a model based on differential provision and market logic.
Sadgopal consistently maintained that the real issue was not simply access to schooling but access to equitable, quality education through a Common School System. Such a system would ensure that children from different social and economic backgrounds studied together in neighbourhood schools, thereby strengthening both democracy and social cohesion.
His critique deserves renewed attention because many of his concerns have since materialised. The rapid expansion of private education, coaching industries, corporate participation, and differentiated learning pathways has widened educational inequality. Education is increasingly viewed as a commodity to be purchased rather than a right to be guaranteed.
Global financial institutions have also played a significant role in shaping educational reforms across the developing world. Policies promoted by the World Bank and other international agencies have often emphasised efficiency, decentralisation, public-private partnerships, and measurable outcomes. While these ideas are presented as technical reforms, they frequently reduce education to an economic instrument serving labour markets instead of a democratic institution serving society.
India has not been immune to these trends. Since economic liberalisation, education policy has increasingly reflected market priorities. Public investment has failed to keep pace with growing demand, while private providers have expanded rapidly across all levels of education.
Equally disturbing has been the role of the intellectual elite. Many respected academics who speak passionately about secularism, democracy and constitutional values have remained largely silent on the neoliberal restructuring of education. Some have actively supported it. Opposition has often focused on ideological issues while ignoring structural changes that have steadily weakened public education.
This selective criticism has serious consequences. A multi-layered education system creates fertile ground for every form of inequality—economic, social, cultural and ideological. Once education becomes unequal by design, it becomes easier for political and social divisions to deepen.
The distinction between equality and inclusion is particularly important. Inclusion seeks to accommodate disadvantaged groups within an unequal system. Equality seeks to transform the system itself. Contemporary educational discourse increasingly celebrates inclusion while neglecting equality. Yet constitutional democracy rests upon equality, not merely inclusion.
The struggle over education is therefore not simply about budgets or school buildings. It concerns the character of Indian society itself. Education shapes citizenship, social mobility, critical thinking and democratic participation. A society that accepts unequal education inevitably accepts unequal citizenship.
The debate also extends beyond classrooms. Communities across India continue to struggle over water, forests, land and livelihoods. Education must be recognised as a fifth public resource. Without equitable education, citizens cannot effectively defend any of the other rights essential to democratic life.
This is why public education cannot be left entirely to market forces. Markets distribute goods according to purchasing power. Democracies distribute rights according to citizenship. Confusing the two fundamentally alters the relationship between the State and its people.
The constitutional promise of equal educational opportunity remains unfinished. It requires renewed public commitment to neighbourhood schools, adequate public investment, professionally supported teachers, and common standards of quality across social classes. These objectives are neither utopian nor outdated. Many successful education systems around the world continue to be built upon precisely these principles.
India's education debate must therefore move beyond narrow political controversies. Whether one opposes communalisation or supports secular education, whether one favours technological innovation or traditional pedagogy, the central constitutional question remains the same: will every child receive education of equal quality as a matter of right?
Unless that question is answered affirmatively, educational reform will remain incomplete.
The future of Indian democracy depends not only on what children are taught, but also on whether they are educated together as equals. The Constitution envisioned education as the foundation of a just and democratic republic. Recovering that vision requires resisting the reduction of education into another marketplace.
The struggle for equal education is therefore not merely an educational issue. It is a struggle for the constitutional idea of India itself.
---
The author, associated with the socialist movement, is a former teacher at Delhi University and a former fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla
Comments
Post a Comment
NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor